Selling Our Birthright for a Convention of States Bill

Governor Henry McMaster on the SC Statehouse grounds after signing H. 3205 calling for an Article 5 Convention.

 

“And Jacob sod pottage: and Esau came from the field, and he was faint: And Esau said to Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with that same red pottage; for I am faint: therefore was his name called Edom. And Jacob said, Sell me this day thy birthright. And Esau said, Behold, I am at the point to die: and what profit shall this birthright do to me? And Jacob said, Swear to me this day; and he sware unto him: and he sold his birthright unto Jacob. Then Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentiles; and he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way: thus Esau despised his birthright.” — Genesis 25:29-34

 

A simple Bible story reminds us of what happens when you sell your birthright—you lose all that you had up until that point, and everything that was promised to you. That’s the story of America. As Americans we have a birthright of liberty and freedom under God and the rule of Law as promised to us through our forefathers who fought against England’s king George III. We have had “a Republic”, and as Benjamin Franklin is known to have said, “if we can keep it.”

 

Governor Henry McMaster Broke his campaign Promise when he signed H. 3205

 

The possibility of that all changing may be a real possibility now since Gov. Henry McMaster has signed H 3205. On Wednesday evening McMaster reneged on a campaign promise he made in 2018, to oppose an Article V Convention. At that time he said that he had concerns of unintended consequences such as removing gun rights, or altering or eliminating the electoral college. Apparently he warmed up to the idea and is now ok in betraying the people of South Carolina, and the nation, to the idea of an Article 5 Constitutional convention promoted by the ignorant and deceiver alike.

This is similar in form to the way McMaster handled what some have called the “CONvid-1984” so-called pandemic. That’s when the Governor ordered the shutdown of “non-essential businesses.” Those “non-essential businesses” just happen to provide the employment of local citizens, are avenues for local food producers, artisans and other suppliers, and the businesses that provided the income those same people need to pay their bills and keep food on their table. In fact that is the whole reason to have a business because it is essential!

 

Among those who praised the signing were 1st District Congressional candidate Katie Arrington. In a statement she applauded McMaster’s decision to sign H3205, and said:

“In 2017, I was honored to be one of the initial signatories on this key legislation. The federal government has rapidly expanded, and our country cannot afford to continue on this trajectory. Career politicians and radical liberals in DC have used their office for self gain while running up the bill and leaving it for the generations to come. This legislation will allow us to institute term limits to end the stranglehold of career politicians, and allow us to shift to a zero based budget so the government is no longer viewed as a piggy bank. I am glad that Governor McMaster signed this bill into law.”

 

The Standard first wrote about the trouble with an Article 5 Constitutional Convention (A5C), often times called a Convention of States, back in February 2020. Harold Pease wrote Failure to Preserve Federalism has Cost Much Liberty to reveal the trouble with an A5C.

And troubles with an A5C are plenty! Various groups, notably the Convention of “States” (COS) organizations, led by Mark Meckler have lobbied State Legislators to pass applications in SC, across the country, to ask Congress to call an Article V Convention. It finally took hold in SC. 

Meckler touted Robbie George as a conservative Constitutional scholar who agrees with all Meckler has to say. Fact of the matter is that George was on the National Constitution Center’s Constitution Drafting Project to draft a new constitution!

In an article by Joanna R. Martin in The Standard entitled “COS” Board Member Drafted ‘New Constitution’ That Imposes Gun Control, George is shown to have drafted a new Constitution which severely restricts the Right of the People to keep and bear arms!

George’s new version of the US Constitution says at Article I, Sec. 12, clause 7:

“Neither the States nor the United State [sic] shall make or enforce any law infringing the right to keep and bear arms of the sort ordinarily used for self-defense or recreational purposes, provided that States, and the United States in places subject to its general regulatory authority, may enact and enforce reasonable regulations on the bearing of arms, and the keeping of arms by persons determined, with due process, to be dangerous to themselves or others.”

 

Among the many potential problems an A5C brings are mandated health care, removal of 2nd Amendment protections, and removing the electoral college. But, the entire Constitution could be scrapped as was the case the first and only time a Constitutional Convention has been called. An A5C is a no holds barred convention and anything goes, contrary to what proponents state. The delegates set the rules, and the delegates at present would include Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Senator Chuck Schumer among many others.

This writer wrote in March 2020, that:

Regardless of the specifics of each proposal, a constitutional convention is a serious threat to our inalienable rights – as it would literally allow the rewriting of the constitution and Bill of Rights. In addition, many of the desired “reforms” – balanced budget amendment, term limits, etc. – are already enacted at the state level, but have not eliminated debt, excessive spending or government overreach. Finally, the state lawmakers who routinely violate our own laws and state constitution would be in charge of the process of picking the individuals who would rewrite the Constitution.

 

McMaster wrote in a letter to A5C proponent Representative Bill Taylor, R-District 86, Aiken, late Wednesday:

Today I have signed into law R-141, H. 3205, a joint resolution making application to Congress to call a convention of the States under Article V of the United States Constitution for purposes of proposing amendments limited to those that impose fiscal restraints on the federal government, limit the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, and limit the terms of office for members of Congress and other federal officials. The course of our human events explains why.

 

The restrictions McMaster mentions above in his letter are powers that Congress and state legislators already possess! The Congress and the State legislature can limit spending, the power and scope of the federal government, and they can pass term limits if they want to do that already. Problem is, they don’t want to do that!

That would take discipline, courage and commitment (which most of those elected don’t have) to resist those who pulls the purse strings, and provide the benefits and upward political and social movement they receive outside the halls of Congress and the State House. Organizations like the Aspen Institute and their Aspen Global Leadership Network, Liberty Fellowship, multitudes of national associations among others, and the “Convention of States” organization. These all help those elected to represent us, to somehow ‘see more clearly’ to promote the globalist aspirations of the organizations who allow them to enter their exclusive “Leadership” ranks and promote their globalist ideas. And this is not limited to one side of the aisle or the other, both are equally guilty.

That’s where John and Jane Doe citizen come into play. They—YOU—have to get involved on your local and state level to elect people who will pass legislation you want like term limits, or fiscal restraints. The process is not magic, you cannot wave a magic wand over the problem and suddenly have a genie appear to take care of it. It takes a lot of hard work! Unfortunately, Americans have had it so easy they often times don’t want to put in the work to make change.

The Post & Courier wrote, “opponents from across the political spectrum have warned legislators there’s no way to limit discussion on proposed changes, and the end result could be a drastic altering of America. Opponents on the conservative end argue the proposed fix might backfire and produce liberal policies, like outlawing guns.”

 

McMaster said later in his letter:

Over the years, South Carolinians, like all Americans, have witnessed an unprecedented expansion in the size and scope of this federal government. Along with increasing instances of overreach and intrusions into the affairs of—and matters expressly reserved to—the States, we have observed, with little-to-no recourse, the federal government spending and borrowing money at dangerous levels to fund this growth in government. Efforts to rein in federal spending and reduce the national debt have repeatedly met resistance from the parties in power at the time. It has become clear that Congress is unwilling or unable to set aside its self-serving institutional interests in preserving and expanding the size and reach of the federal government. Thus, any initiative to reduce the size of the federal government must originate elsewhere.

 

That “unprecedented expansion in the size and scope of this federal government” McMaster speaks of is totally controlled by whether the State accepts federal money, and the strings that go along with it to a great degree. Again, the federal Republic we were given is not a top down model unless it presents us with tremendous problems—like now—and is very dependent upon “We the People” to exercise our franchise to thwart the expansion of government.

This ability has been hacked away over the years such as passage of the 16th Amendment to do away with taxing requirements based upon “apportionment among the several States“ opening the doors to unlimited spending by Congress. This opened the door to not only spending but unconstitutional regulations.  Thus “states became addicted to federal money making it near impossible for them to “just say no” to federal takeover in their domestic dominion. A third of their resources come from the federal government.”

Another attack on the Constitution came with the direct election of US Senators in the 17th Amendment, instead of the state legislature voting them in. Although legitimately passed the 17th has wreaked havoc on the country. Then Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution lists the only 18 powers the government has, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

 

McMaster finished his letter with the following:

As elections have repeatedly failed to reverse this course, I believe that the time has come to utilize the mechanism expressly available to the States in Article V, often called a “Convention of States.” Two thirds of the States must issue the call. Whether an Article V Convention would ultimately be held or propose amendments to the Constitution remains to be seen. However, I believe, at a minimum, this action will awaken and consolidate the attention and patriotism of the people to the threats to their liberties, with beneficial and consequential impact on the Congress to the same ends.

Serious concerns have been raised about the potential consequences of convening an Article V Convention. I share these concerns. I view our Constitution as the most remarkable governmental document in human history. Some leaders foresee a “runaway” convention which could propose amendments beyond the scope of the call. Others prefer that we depend on enlightened future electorates. I see it a little differently. I see the ever-increasing size and scope of the federal government as the larger threat.

I believe that our dangerous situation is a product not of imprecision by the Constitution’s Framers but of activist judges who have ignored the Constitution’s text to advance their own policy goals, and the self-centered ambitions of too many office holders. I believe our situation will only get worse—and more difficult to correct—with time. Although we have seen an increase in textualist and originalist judges, the combination of current circumstances and the slow march and uncertainty of federal courts reshaping constitutional law counsels in favor of the States exploring the limited measures available to them to rein in the federal government.

I do not think these serious theoretical concerns warrant opposing a narrowly tailored Article V Convention at this time. I believe that the Founding Fathers included sufficient safeguards in Article V to mitigate the risks of a “runaway” convention. Article V’s requirement that three-fourths of the States must ratify any proposed constitutional amendment is designed to ensure that proposed amendments which would alter or take away fundamental constitutional rights—such as those enshrined in the Second Amendment—would not become law. This—and the active awareness and support of the people— constitutes our strongest assurance.

 

There are consequences for allowing others to run the affairs of our lives in state and federal government. In fact they may steal away the very laws and freedoms all of us living today have always had a right to enjoy if we will exercise them.

Unfortunately, Governor McMaster and I disagree on how to solve the issue. It is a matter of history that the current US Constitution came into being by a convention of states. My question is why did the Governor break his promise to oppose an A5C, Convention of States, when he specifically stated in 2018 that he would oppose it? Has something changed substantially about it? Yes, there were many people who regularly gathered in support of the A5C bill, but there are just as many and probably more who oppose it.

Governor McMaster is certainly an intelligent man. As a former practicing lawyer has the insight, knowledge, and training to understand what a Convention of States could possibly entail and what could be the outcome of it regardless of what his letter states. Question is, does the Governor really believe what he has written and truly changed his mind on his promise to oppose, or have the globalist powers that exist in SC pulled his strings for higher office or something else? And while the Governor, the State Legislature and others complain about a bloated federal government, SC continues to accept federal monies for unconstitutional projects that further hurl us down the slippery slope of no return.

Former first lady Nancy Reagan used to say, “Just say No!” And we can too! Unfortunately, we are now on a collision course with an uncertain Constitutional destiny after the Governor signed the documents to sell our birthright.

 

Michael Reed is Publisher of The Standard newspaper, print and online, and TheStandardSC YouTube channel where many video reports may be found. Please share freely and donate to The Standard on this page to assure the continued availability of news that is ignored too often by the dominant media.

Please “like”, comment, share with a friend, and donate to support The Standard on this page. Become a Patron!

Donate Any Amount